Hajj Sun Protection Study: AI Qualitative Analysis

The PLoS ONE study on Hajj sun protection, published on November 11, 2026, found that pilgrims and nurses recognized the burden of sun exposure but had limited understanding of UV-specific risks and UPF-rated products.

The study used semi-structured interviews with 16 Saudi pilgrims and 13 registered nurses, conducted from June 20 to July 11, 2025, and identified five major themes: physical and emotional effects, knowledge gaps, cultural influences, barriers, and recommendations.

• According to the November 11, 2026 PLoS ONE study, 29 participants were interviewed, including 16 pilgrims and 13 nurses involved in the 2025 Hajj season.
• According to the study authors, interviews lasted approximately 30 to 45 minutes and were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic analysis approach.
• The PLoS ONE researchers reported that participants frequently described exhaustion, dizziness, dehydration, and fainting as heat-related experiences, while UV-specific effects were raised less often.
• The study reported that language differences, product cost, limited availability, cultural clothing norms, discomfort, and forgetting protective items reduced consistent sun protection.
• The study authors recommended structured pre-Hajj education, multilingual communication, affordable protective products, and messages that clearly distinguish heat-related illness from UV-related harm.

The November 11, 2026 PLoS ONE study examined awareness, attitudes, and behaviors related to sunscreen, UPF-rated clothing, umbrellas, and other sun-protection measures during Hajj.

The researchers conducted retrospective Zoom interviews from June 20 to July 11, 2025, within approximately one month of the 2025 Hajj season. The sample included 16 Saudi pilgrims and 13 registered nurses who had worked in hospitals in Makkah and Madinah.

The PLoS ONE research team interviewed all pilgrims and Saudi nurses in Arabic, interviewed one non-Saudi nurse in English, transcribed interviews verbatim, and audited a random 20% sample of translated transcripts against the original Arabic recordings.

The researchers used purposive sampling and assessed saturation separately for pilgrims and nurses. The study reported that saturation was reached after 16 pilgrim interviews and 13 nurse interviews, when the final two to three interviews in each group produced no new codes.

The study used NVivo 12.6, independent coding of an initial 20% transcript sample by three researchers, consensus discussions, and Lincoln and Guba’s criteria for qualitative trustworthiness.

One nurse summarized the knowledge gap by saying, "Honestly, I have no knowledge about UV-protection products, " according to the November 11, 2026 PLoS ONE study. One pilgrim similarly said, "I didn’t even know there are special fabrics for blocking UV rays."

The November 11, 2026 PLoS ONE study shows that effective health communication must separate heat-related illness from UV-related harm because participants often treated both risks as the same sun exposure problem.

The study authors reported that participants associated sun exposure mainly with heat symptoms such as exhaustion, dizziness, dehydration, and fainting. The researchers explained that hydration, rest, and cooling address heat-related illness, while sunscreen and UPF-rated clothing or umbrellas address UV exposure.

The study found that cultural beliefs shaped behavior in both restrictive and enabling ways. Some participants described older pilgrims as viewing physical hardship as part of the spiritual challenge of Hajj, while other participants reported that umbrella use had become more socially accepted.

The researchers identified different priorities by participant group. Nurses emphasized multilingual communication, formal training, and institutional preparedness, while pilgrims emphasized cost, comfort, access, and forgetting protective items.

For qualitative researchers, the study demonstrates why cross-segment analysis matters. Comparing pilgrim and nurse interviews can show where groups agree, where their explanations differ, and which interventions address individual behavior versus institutional conditions.

Because the study included only Saudi pilgrims during one Hajj season, the authors cautioned that the findings should not automatically represent the wider international Hajj population. Health teams should therefore treat the findings as context-specific qualitative evidence rather than statistical estimates for all pilgrims.

This is a research and public health interpretation, not medical advice or a diagnostic assessment.

The November 11, 2026 PLoS ONE study shows how qualitative interviews can reveal the difference between recognizing sun exposure and understanding the specific actions needed to reduce heat and UV risks.

The study’s 29 interviews produced five themes and highlighted why researchers should compare participant groups, preserve multilingual meaning, and connect reported behaviors to cultural and practical context.

AI qualitative analysis can make this work more manageable by accelerating thematic coding, cross-segment comparisons, evidence retrieval, and synthesis while keeping researchers responsible for interpretation and validation.

Researchers working with interviews, open-ended survey responses, or multilingual documents can try Evidano for free to organize qualitative evidence and turn participant accounts into clearer, reviewable findings.